Posted by kim on 07/27/06 12:17

"Temsonic" <dim.sp@miau.diolch> wrote in message
news:OCHwg.14267$u%3.5103@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Gunther Gloop" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:4ia7vgF2tcj6U1@individual.net...
> > Gary Kelman wrote:
> >>> Possibly this can never be done in a digital format -and if not, we
> >>> could see a push towards a "return" to a high-quality analogue
> >>> format for purists at some stage.
> >>>
> >>> But who knows?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hmm, I never thought of that. To compare it to music, I've thought in
> >> the last year or so, that vinyl will one day outsell CD again. Not
> >> for a while, but eventually and for the same reason as you say for
> >> films. The CD vs vinyl debate is something everyone has a opinion on,
> >> I wonder if people are as bothered about films though?
> >>
> >
> > I'm not sure people are as bothered about higher-than-dvd quality films
to
> > be honest (the general public I mean). Afterall, most people were quite
> > content with VHS.
> > But after a few years of nothing but digital I wouldn't at all be
> > surprised with "experts" announcing the holy grail of home-cinema...
> > *ANALOGUE!*
> >
> > ...Although I'd imagine that day to be at least 10 years away... more
like
> > 15 - 20 even.
> >
> > -Kevin.
>
> A lot of people seem to be overlooking particular aspects of the move from
> standard def DVD to high def and are likening it to the switch from VHS to
> DVD. It's _not_ like moving from VHS to DVD, because that move wasn't only
> about the picture resolution and sound quality.
>
> Firstly there was the move from tape to disc, which brought about the
> ability to access any point of the film more or less immediately and
removed
> the need to rewind it afterwards, as well as content that could be changed
> on the fly, ie multiple audio tracks, video angles, optional subtitles,
> interactive elements etc. Then there's their ability to hold 5.1
soundtracks
> and switch between anamorphic and non-anamorphic output, and the fact that
> for the first time the vast majority of films were being released in the
> original aspect ratio as standard etc, and this in turn encouraged mass
> consumer buying of widescreen TV's and surround sound systems. None of
this
> was available with VHS, the leap to DVD was massive.

DVD had two overwhelming advantages over VHS.
1) It was far cheaper than laserdisc, especially imported laserdisc.
2) You could access titles which were previously banned by the Video
Recording Act.

I doubt whether technical factors made any difference to early adopters.

(kim)

[Back to original message]